Sandy Lee

Okay. For the record, I'd like to say that these changes were supported by not only the PSAC, UNW and NWT Federation of Labour, but also the NWT Construction Association, and that was, I think, mentioned in the report. Let me just say this again. From what I understand, if someone gets injured in a workplace, if they could prove that that happened in the workplace, doesn't have to prove but there's enough through medical opinion or whatever that the work had something to do with it. That doesn't have to be dominantly work, but if work had something to do with it, then you will be...

Could I get the Minister to commit that section 92 will be read in context of section 1.1? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is a clause on causation, which obviously is one of the crucial components in this new legislation. As was indicated in the committee report, there have been amendments to this legislation to make the standard of proving cause as being something that’s dominant in the workplace. I’m wondering, regarding dominant causes of workplace injury, and I’m wondering if, for the interest of those who are listening to this, the Minister or his staff could explain how this would be implemented in the real cases? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question on clause 92 which deals with the presumption in favour of injured workers and this is a very important and often controversial component of the workers’ compensation legislative system. I know the workers who go through the claim process, some of them feel that they’re not always treated with the presumption in favour of them as injured workers, and probably the workers in the system don’t agree. Anyway, I would like to ask the Minister how this section will be different than what was in place prior to this legislation in a specific term. I don’t...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Without having had a chance to look at the letter I don’t know how final it was, but listening to Mr. Premier I think that there might be a wee little tiny bit of room open there. So could I ask the Premier, could I take his answer to mean that he’s encouraging his department to work with this group to see if there are any other avenues and perhaps he could commit to asking the MACA department to look at that further? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I read that subsection 2(2) and it says, “they shall seek the opinion of another medical professional who specializes in the area of the conflict.” It says they shall seek but it’s not clear to me whether the medical advisor or the worker will have the same say on who that third medical opinion should be. Is that the correct way to do that? Is that the sound medical opinion to say that both parties have equal power? It doesn’t say they have to agree.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today my questions are in following up to the Member’s statement I made about the proposal being put forward by the SideDoor in support of a program that would, I think, create another opportunity for the youth in the community to spend their time productively. Mr. Speaker, I have to say that in my time as an MLA, I’ve had the good fortune of meeting and working with a lot of young people who are doing great things, a lot of positive things, taking full advantage of all the financial assistance and everything available to reach their potential, but we all...

Thank you. I do understand that and I approve that interpretation. I think that’s what we meant to do. I think it’s the difference between medical opinion and medical evidence. I just wanted to make sure that we put it on record, so that people out there could feel comfort in how this legislation will be interpreted. In the remaining seconds, I just want to ask the panel on subsection (4). It states there that much of how this will be implemented will be written out in the policies and procedures. First of all, would the Minister and Governance Council be willing to set up some sort of...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have supported two programs in particular; one is the SideDoor program and the other is the COPs program. Mr. Speaker, I believe strongly the real work and real difference can only be made by governments working and supporting the grassroots organizations and programs like these from the bottom up, rather than introducing a solution from top to bottom. In my opinion, the government has not done enough to support these initiatives and I urge the Minister of Justice and the Minister responsible for Youth to work with its partners and put some real money and support...

Thank you. I want to reserve my question about subsection (4) again, but just following up on what Mr. Wright said, what assurance do workers have in listening to this explanation of subsection (3) that the new medical evidence will only be about something that was unknown, something totally new that would change your resolution, but it would not be another third opinion that would just reverse your decision? Do you know what I mean? That’s what the workers are concerned about…or maybe WCB side, too. That there is some standard on what that new medical evidence should be that would put the...